Support grows for U.S. "drone court" to review lethal strikes

WASHINGTON, Feb 8 (Reuters) - During a fresh round of debatethis week over President Barack Obama's claim that he canunilaterally order lethal strikes by unmanned aircraft againstU.S. citizens, some lawmakers proposed a middle ground: aspecial federal "drone court" that would approve suspectedmilitants for targeting.

While the idea of a judicial review of such operations maybe gaining political currency, multiple U.S. officials said onFriday that imminent action by the U.S. Congress or the WhiteHouse to create one is unlikely. The idea is being activelyconsidered, however, according to a White House official.

At Thursday's confirmation hearing for CIA director nomineeJohn Brennan, senators discussed establishing a secret court ortribunal to rule on the validity of cases that U.S. intelligenceagencies draw up for killing suspected militants using drones.

The court could be modeled on an existing court whichexamines applications for electronic eavesdropping on suspectedspies or terrorists.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democratic chairwoman of theSenate Intelligence Committee, said Thursday that she planned to"review proposals for ... legislation to ensure that dronestrikes are carried out in a manner consistent with our values,and the proposal to create an analogue of the ForeignIntelligence Surveillance Court to review the conduct of suchstrikes."

Senator Angus King, a Maine independent, said during thehearing that he envisioned a scenario in which executive branchofficials would go before a drone court "in a confidential andtop-secret way, make the case that this American citizen is anenemy combatant, and at least that would be ... some check onthe activities of the executive."

King suggested that only drone attacks on U.S. citizenswould need court approval; other proposals leave open thepossibility that such a court could also rule regarding dronestrikes on non-Americans.

On Friday, a White House official indicated theadministration was open to the idea. Without specificallymentioning drones, the official said "the White House has beendiscussing various ways there could be independent review ofcounterterrorism actions for more than a year."

Even if a special court were established, however,congressional and administration officials said it would nothappen quickly.

Congressional aides said discussions are at a preliminarystage, with officials also reviewing proposals that lawprofessors have floated in academic articles.

On Friday, King sent a letter to Feinstein and RepublicanSaxby Chambliss, intelligence committee vice-chairman, askingthem to work with him on legislation to create a court whichcould provide judicial review of proposals to target a droneattack against a U.S. citizen alleged to be a "senioroperational leader of Al Qaeda."

In the past, Obama administration officials have expressed alack of interest when the idea of creating a court to vet dronetargets was brought up, one congressional official said. Theadministration also has fought lawsuits filed by relatives ofAnwar al-Awlaki, the American-born al Qaeda operative who waskilled in a U.S. drone attack in Yemen in 2011.

On Friday, senior Democrats and Republicans on the Senateand House Judiciary committees sent Obama letters requestingthat their committees be given access to Justice Departmentdocuments justifying drone strikes. Some members of thecongressional intelligence committees had been given such accessthe night before Brennan's confirmation hearing in an apparentattempt by the administration to mollify some critics.

"We have courts that are fully capable and experienced" indealing with sensitive national security matters, he said.Federal courts in Washington, New York City, and Alexandria,Virginia, routinely handle highly classified materials yetoperate with more transparency and more independence than theultra-secretive foreign intelligence court, Anders said.

If the United States did set up a drone target court, humanrights advocates would still likely have problems with it.

Geoffrey Robertson, one of Britain's most prominent humanrights lawyers, described the current U.S. drone-strike policyas "execution without trial" and "international killing (which)... violates the right to life."

Robertson said that in his interpretation of internationallaw, any court set up to review candidates for possible droneattacks would have to publish target lists, so that those listedwould have an opportunity either to give themselves up or beable to have friends or relatives petition for their removalfrom the lists.